domain:theintrinsicperspective.com?page=3
Primaprimaprima
Bigfoot is an interdimensional being
3m ago
I think the criteria is that if it’s not bad enough for your own side to care (I mean a large number of people genuinely caring, en masse, rather than just some senators thinking “I’m gonna have to burn some political credit to confirm this guy”), then it’s not a genuine moral infraction, and it can be assumed that the alleged outrage on the opposing side is largely performative.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
38m ago
Epstein involved girls younger than that, in greater quantity, with elements of coercion, going unpunished, and potentially for the purpose of blackmail on behalf of a foreign nation. These are not comparable events.
rverghes
45m ago
Because there's usually a rule about maximum line length, in order to keep lines fitting inside the screen or window. Variable-length tabs play havoc with that rule, and auto-formatters would be constantly flipping lines back and forth as code was touched by different developers. Which introduces a lot of extra noise into commits.
Not to mention that sometimes we use tabs to deliberately format things into columns, not just indent code. Variable-length tabs throw that off.
All in all, the gains from having the code look the exact same for each developer outweighs the individual aesthetic gain of your preferred tab size.
Tophattingson
1hr ago
And for what it's worth from an Atheist, I've only ever seen this attitude get applied towards Christians, not towards the religious in general. Opposing e.g. Islamophobia has the baked-in assumption that Muslims can't simply choose to not be Muslim to avoid discrimination. But when it comes to discriminating against 'fundies' there's no such consideration.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1hr ago
No, I was merely acknowledging the circumstances in which the argument for an absolute never-respond-to-words-with-violence-never-ever-never-forever policy is at its weakest.
"Acknowledging" is the wrong word. You were advocating for or choosing those circumstances based on your own principles of what is most offensive. These do not turn out to be universal. For instance, insulting someone's mother's the way you mentioned is often considered sufficient provocation, to the point where you'd only expect Bob to do it if he WANTED a physical fight.
Chrisprattalpharaptr
Ave Imperaptor
1hr ago
The daily podcast yesterday laid out what they expected would have happened. Senate democrats would have asked Gaetz if he had ever paid women for sex (illegal in Florida and most of the US), whereupon he could have:
- Deny ever having done it. The leaked documents combined with the alleged testimony of the women already show that the vast majority of people would see that as perjury.
- Admit it, in which case you have a candidate for AG admitting to committing a crime just prior to being sworn in.
- Plead the fifth, which would also be remarkable and apparently a bridge too far even for Trump.
Perhaps I'm being overly cynical, but I'm surprised democrats wouldn't hold onto this until Gaetz had been confirmed so they could use it as a cudgel against the Trump administration. Maybe they genuinely think he'll wreck the DoJ in a way that his substitute may not.
anti_dan
1hr ago
That is just what happens if you don't censor the right. Progressives have been coddled so long they cant win fair fights. As JD showed in the debate, they cant win 3v1 debates.
MaximumCuddles
2hr ago
I think rationalists in particular are prone to simply not understanding his type of skill as skill at all. It’s an unfortunate side effect of the credentialism that absolutely plagues the blue tribe, including the renegade blue tribe “dark elves” that are common here.
Trump has an instinctual, intuitive quality to him that eludes certain types of rational analysis, which doesn’t mean there isn’t an underlying logic to it. Increasingly the people around him have the same type of energy and will.
It’s really deeper than TDS it’s a civilization wide blind spot of the type of leaders and personalities which used to be more commonly revered before managerialism became cancerous and infected our collective brain.
Hieronymus
2hr ago
I think it was several years ago now that they made messages impossible to use from the mobile web site so that they could pressure you to install the messenger application.
SlowBoy
2hr ago
If you want to argue that Trump is in the flow zone, sure, I could see it. OP is arguing that Trump is just incompetent and acting totally at random. This isn't understanding, this is anti-understanding, because it requires ignoring actual patterns and insights that are very plainly apparent. It comes off as TDS.
Pasha
Defend Kebab
3hr ago
Rust's default indentation that cargo fmt forces on everyone is pretty solid and I am super happy that literally everyone uses the same style everywhere.
f3zinker
Its A/B testing all the way down
3hr ago
I'm fairly confident if we hadn't done that it would have been a good relationship when I returned.
This has been bugging me a lot. There is a good chance if I just let it stay, when she is back in a a couple of months, we would both be single and wouldn't have found anything better, and there is a real chance of rekindling.
Keep moving forward while she's gone
My fear is that I don't end up moving forward, I just settle for someone else, and she sees that as the door closing.
If she finds someone else, IDC, at least I would know that the chapter is closed. But now there are possibilities of it working out in the future but they hang on everything falling into place at the right time and place.
iprayiam3
3hr ago
I get that mores change and republicans have abandoned even the pretense of moral majority, but like 17 year old prostitution is not suprisingly scandalous. It’s not some made up woke shit. It’s what the whole Epstein island implication was… yesterday.
If one personally doesn’t find this scandalous, ok. But the performative surprise that others might is disingenuous
f3zinker
Its A/B testing all the way down
3hr ago
Thanks for the detailed response. I think your judgment based on whatever limited information I gave probably tracks.
What kind of timeline do you propose for steps 1., 2. and 3. ? I have roughly 1.5-2months before she dips and meeting in person is not possible any more.
chooky
3hr ago
Why must a successful person have explicit strategies? I can think of a lot of works of literature with very coherent meaning that the author does not seem to have explicitly intended. Rather, the author seems to be so in tune with the fictional characters and world that the result cannot help but have depth. Why not also a gifted politician? To me, it seems more likely that the superficially haphazard approach to appointments is driven by Trump's talent for identifying and tapping into the zeitgeist, not a detailed dive into the specifics, though I don't doubt that some of the people close to Trump (eg Musk) do seem to have some sort of master plan.
MaximumCuddles
4hr ago
WhiningCoil
4hr ago
I threw down probably 30 to 40 turrets snd they make quick work of them.
BlindDeafRat
4hr ago
I generally agree with this post, so this is more in a further reply to your other post on small scale question sunday.
I would honestly suggest going through that 4chan /lgbt/ archive link I posted in the other thread. Just as an example. I'm a man in a relationship, with another man, and we're both relatively normal. Not feminine, not masculine. But I have AGP as well. I have sexual fantasies of being a woman. In fact they're the predominant type when it comes to fantasies. But in reality I'm attracted to men, and I'm not sexually attracted to women, I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with one either. And this isn't really an uncommon view among various transwomen I've talked to, or lurked around. Like in the agpgen link, despite being about agp, most people seem to be into men.
Another thing to consider is that some people have experienced becoming attracted to men after starting HRT. After all, if you hate your male body, it would make sense you'd hate homosexuality too, since it's just two men. It makes more sense for someone with gender dysphoria to hate homosexuals than someone without. But what if you were female? Would you want to be with a man then?
Otherwise I usually I avoid all openly trans spaces because the main topic of discussion there is being trans, which I don't care about. But if you find more private discussions it's a lot better. Which is why I like agpgen. It's inherently about sex, so people will tend to be more honest about what they really like, rather than what they say to look good to their tribe.
I see transitioning as a valid choice, even if our current technology is lacking when it comes to actually going through it. But if we had more advanced tech, or if there was, like you said, a magic button I could press that would turn me female, I'd press it without hesitation too.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
5hr ago
I killed my first demolisher tonight. Built a tank, built a bunch of shells, drove forward and opened fire.
...I hadn't really accounted for the demolisher's abilities. My tank got severely damaged and I lost a couple bots, but managed to kill it despite the lava bomb spam. Then I made the mistake of reloading to try for a cleaner kill, and it massacred my tank in the next ten or so tries. Finally managed to kill it again, and I think I'll be holding off on expanding my territory until I can figure out a better method. maybe artillery, maybe mines. The lava bombs are extremely difficult to dodge and slow the tank, and it's astonishing how fast "kiting" turns into "getting eaten by a huge worm monster."
If you're going to do turrets, get red ammo; there's no tradeoff since the resources are effectively free, so get several dozen turrets and an entire inventory of ammo. With enough turrets, you should be able to penetrate the regen and armor. Maybe lure it in with a tank, retreat, let the turrets draw its attention, then swing back around to chunk it down with the cannon when it goes for the turrets?
ControlsFreak
5hr ago
I don't see how you can make that conclusion. People currently take a variety of things that don't hurt them; therefore, they will take huge and insane amounts of stuff that hurts them if we let them?
Imagine that we did ban personal auto repair. You have to draw the line somewhere, so there's some unregulated space where people could go ahead and buy, like, bumper stickers, stuff that hangs down from their rear view mirror, or even vortex generators. And someone observed that folks do a bunch of stuff with their car that is stupid and doesn't provably help the car go faster, run longer, or get better fuel economy. They then conclude that it would be a disaster if we stopped banning personal auto repair, because that obviously implies that masses and masses of people would severely hurt themselves. Why couldn't we end up with the world we have now, where most people still just take their car to a professional, but some do it themselves? Yes, some people hurt themselves doing it themselves, but I don't see why we should have concluded that it would be a huge, mammoth disaster.
I would note that I think there's probably a significant difference between a label that says, "These claims about being vaguely good for your hair health or whatever are not evaluated by the FDA," while still being cognizant that the product has been evaluated for safety... and a label that says, "This product will seriously harm or kill you if taken improperly; please consult a medical professional."
Dean
5hr ago
So, American investors were victims of fraud because Adanis claimed that their business was above ground in investment rounds. Then used American investment dollars for bribes. That is a crime in the US ?
Yup. This is why the western sanctions regimes can be so disruptive- it is really, really easy to fall into foreign jurisdictions when financial services are in play.
In international contexts, nations can assert jurisdiction fora couple of reasons, including the nationality principle (a state can punish their citizens- and corporate entities- for misconduct abroad), and the territorial principle (a state can punish misconduct on its own territory).
Both are relevant in this case, as using American investment corporations for bribes abroad is a nationality issue, and using the American financial system at all places it in American territory. That it is also in the Indian jurisdiction is irrelevant, though if the Indians wanted to pursue prosecution they'd probably be able to preempt the US effort, but the fact that Adani group is mostly based out of India is irrelevant. 'Mostly' is not enough- any exposure to another authority's jurisdiction is enough to require full compliance with those laws (hence why China or the EU can compel American social media companies to cooperate on censorship as a condition for market access).
ControlsFreak
5hr ago
the doctor
Makes it sound like there's only one. People often have many different doctors for many different things. It's more likely that they only have one pharmacist, or, rather, one pharmacy that may employ multiple pharmacists, but at least they're usually on the same computer system. That's the more natural bottleneck to have a pair of expert eyes on the medications you're taking.
In all sincerity, I want to check, for myself, to make sure that I am not completely off base in my interpretation of your phrase.
What are some scholarly ways that a person can investigate the reasoning behind an existing state of affairs, where the existing state of affairs in question is a law or policy?
Investigating the reasoning behind an existing law or policy can be approached from several scholarly perspectives, each employing a range of methods and analytical tools. Below are some approaches that can help uncover the rationale behind a law or policy:
1. Legal Analysis (Doctrine-based Inquiry)
- Statutory Interpretation: Scholars may start by analyzing the text of the law or policy, identifying its purpose, and exploring its language. This involves looking at the legal provisions and examining legislative intent, which can often be found in debates, committee reports, or legislative history.
- Case Law: Reviewing judicial opinions on the law or policy provides insight into how courts interpret and apply the law. A close reading of key decisions may reveal the underlying legal principles, norms, or objectives that shaped the law.
- Legal Doctrines and Principles: Analyzing whether the law or policy aligns with established legal doctrines (e.g., human rights, justice, equity, fairness) can shed light on its underlying reasoning.
2. Historical Analysis
- Historical Context: Investigating the historical development of the law or policy can provide valuable insights. This involves looking at the political, economic, social, and cultural context in which the law or policy was enacted. The scholar could examine the timing of its introduction, significant historical events that might have influenced it, and the role of key individuals or groups.
- Comparative Historical Approaches: Comparing similar laws or policies from different times or places can highlight the factors influencing their formulation and the lessons learned from prior implementations.
3. Political Science Approaches
- Public Policy Analysis: This involves analyzing the policy-making process, identifying the actors involved (e.g., legislators, interest groups, bureaucrats), their objectives, and the political dynamics at play. This approach may involve:
- Agenda-setting theory: Investigating how issues gain attention and become policy topics.
- Policy process models: Examining how the policy is formulated, implemented, and evaluated.
- Political Economy: Scholars may look at the economic interests that shape policy decisions, such as the role of lobbyists, political donations, and the influence of businesses or advocacy groups.
- Institutional Analysis: Understanding how the structure of political institutions (e.g., executive, legislative, judiciary) and their interrelations contribute to the law or policy’s formulation.
4. Sociological Approaches
- Social Theories of Law and Policy: Scholars from a sociological perspective often analyze how laws or policies reflect or enforce social norms, values, and power dynamics. This includes:
- Critical Legal Studies: Investigating how the law is shaped by social power relations and how it might perpetuate inequality or social control.
- Law and Society: Analyzing the broader societal context of law-making, considering how societal forces (e.g., public opinion, cultural attitudes) influence policy decisions.
- Social Movements and Advocacy: Investigating the role of activism or advocacy groups in shaping the law or policy. This includes understanding the strategies used by interest groups to influence legislation.
5. Economic Analysis
- Cost-Benefit Analysis: Economic scholars often investigate the efficiency of laws or policies by assessing their economic costs and benefits. This includes evaluating the outcomes of a policy in terms of economic indicators (e.g., growth, unemployment, income distribution) and assessing whether the law achieves its stated goals.
- Behavioral Economics: Examining how laws and policies affect individual and collective behavior, such as through nudges or incentives, can reveal the underlying rationale for a policy.
- Public Choice Theory: Analyzing how political actors (e.g., lawmakers, bureaucrats) make decisions based on their own interests and incentives, rather than public welfare.
6. Ethical and Philosophical Analysis
- Normative Theories of Justice: Examining the law or policy through the lens of ethical theories, such as utilitarianism, deontology, or Rawlsian justice. This can help clarify the moral rationale behind the law, including whether it seeks to promote fairness, equality, or liberty.
- Human Rights Perspectives: Analyzing whether the law or policy aligns with international human rights standards or principles such as dignity, autonomy, and equality. This is particularly useful when the law or policy in question affects vulnerable populations.
- Public Morality: Investigating whether the law reflects certain moral values or societal goals, such as social cohesion, moral order, or public health.
7. Empirical Research and Data Analysis
- Quantitative Analysis: Using statistical tools to analyze the effects of a policy. For example, if a law was intended to reduce crime rates, scholars may analyze crime data before and after its implementation to assess its effectiveness and the reasoning behind the policy's goals.
- Qualitative Research: Conducting interviews, surveys, or focus groups with stakeholders (e.g., policymakers, affected groups, experts) to gather insights into the reasoning behind the law. This can also involve ethnographic methods to understand the law's impact on everyday life.
8. Critical and Interdisciplinary Approaches
- Feminist Legal Theory: Examining laws or policies from the perspective of gender and power dynamics, considering how policies might reinforce or challenge gender inequality.
- Critical Race Theory: Analyzing how race and racial dynamics influence the creation, interpretation, and implementation of laws or policies.
- Intersectionality: Exploring how multiple social identities (race, gender, class, etc.) interact to shape both the policy’s creation and its effects on different groups in society.
9. International and Comparative Analysis
- Comparative Law: Analyzing how similar laws or policies in different jurisdictions (e.g., countries or states) reflect differing priorities or reasoning. This may reveal the influences of international legal trends, global standards, or local conditions.
- International Relations: Understanding how global agreements, treaties, or transnational issues (e.g., climate change, trade, human rights) shape domestic laws and policies.
By combining these various methods, scholars can develop a multi-dimensional understanding of the reasoning behind laws and policies, exploring their origins, implications, and effectiveness. This interdisciplinary approach helps reveal not only the practical considerations that led to the policy’s creation but also the broader social, economic, and political forces that shaped its development.
So, I don't think you're saying that the only thing we can do is start with Item 1 on that list (in fact, so far, I don't think this has been a significant point of discussion yet). I'm sure we can work through many of these methods, but I put in a bit of effort to make sure that we got Item 2 down, yet I can't tell what you think. Do you think we've gotten that one mostly figured out, or do you think that I'm still missing some information on that one?
EDIT: Just to triple-check that I'm not completely off base and got some aberrant first result, I asked:
If someone begins their scholarly approach by doing the second item on that list, historical analysis, would that be sophistic or shamanic?
Beginning a scholarly approach to investigating the reasoning behind a law or policy by engaging in historical analysis would neither be "sophistic" nor "shamanic" in a scholarly context. Rather, historical analysis is a legitimate and well-respected method in academic research, particularly in the fields of law, political science, sociology, and history itself.
Why it is not sophistic:
"Sophistry" refers to the use of fallacious reasoning or deceptive arguments, often with the intention of misleading others. Sophists in ancient Greece were known for manipulating language and logic to appear knowledgeable or persuasive without necessarily adhering to sound reasoning.
Historical analysis is grounded in evidence, documentation, and critical inquiry. When scholars use historical analysis to investigate the origins and development of a law or policy, they are engaging with primary sources, such as legislative records, political speeches, or societal events, to reconstruct the context and motivations behind the policy. This approach adheres to scholarly rigor and is not aimed at deceiving or distorting facts. It’s about understanding how a law came into being and the historical forces that shaped it, rather than manipulating or obscuring truth for rhetorical effect.
Why it is not shamanic:
"Shamanic" refers to practices associated with indigenous spiritual or religious rituals, often involving trance states, supernatural beliefs, or communication with spirits. In contrast, historical analysis in the scholarly sense involves using empirical evidence, documents, and critical thinking to understand past events and trends.
While some might see historical analysis as uncovering "hidden" meanings or interpreting events through a particular lens, it remains firmly grounded in empirical evidence and logical reasoning. It doesn't involve mystical or supernatural interpretation but rather seeks to understand the causes and effects of historical events through a scholarly, evidence-based process.
In summary:
Using historical analysis as a starting point for understanding the reasoning behind a law or policy is a valid scholarly approach. It is neither sophistic (which involves deceptive argumentation) nor shamanic (which involves mystical or spiritual practices), but rather a rigorous, evidence-based method that helps scholars understand the social, political, and economic factors that shaped a given law or policy.
I was extremely suprised to find discussion that there are large income disparities by MBTI type https://old.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/cvmx18/iq_vs_salary_by_mbti_type/
unfortunately it seems to be averaged by gender, looks like disparities would be even large when disagreggated by gender when they say that correlation IQ vs income is low (for some value of 'low'), do they factor in personality?
More options
Context Copy link